Trump’s campaign: a saga of backpedaling

Has Donald Trump finally reached the turning point in his campaign?

Over the course of the Republican nominee’s campaign, he’s made countless missteps and highly questionable policy decisions — whether it was announcing a ban on Muslim immigration, building a Mexico-funded wall along the United States’ southern border or suggesting the use of nuclear weapons against ISIS.

Time and time again, media outlets across the nation have predicated a new era in Trump’s campaign where he will supposedly change his ways. The first possible sign of this impending moment came in March after a violent protest during a Trump rally when Dr. Ben Carson said, “You’re going to see Trump pivoting.”

To my surprise, “pivot” in this case does not refer to the strategic phase of a presidential race where both nominees begin to shift their policies to appeal toward the moderate and independent populous of America. Instead, the Trump pivot has been a continuous trend of attempts to fix the media outrage he creates on a daily basis.

After the Orlando club shooting this past June in which 49 people died, Trump used the attack to advocate for the “good guy with a gun” theory.

“If we had people where the bullets were going in the opposite direction… if some of those wonderful people had guns… that would have been a beautiful, beautiful sight folks,” Trump said in a speech following the event.

Despite the cheers of approval this statement received from Trump’s pro-gun audience, three days later, Trump tweeted out a contradictory statement clarifying that by people with guns, he meant “additional guards or employees.” This precarious play on words is a tactic that has allowed Trump to cast a shadow of ambiguity on his platform’s policies.

The correction was one of Trump’s weekly pivots.

Aside from the fact that there actually was an armed security guard at the club who exchanged gunfire with the attacker, this instance plainly illustrates Trump’s hasty ability to change positions.

His record is dotted with such moves: when he said women should be “punished” for having abortions, when he hesitantly disavowed David Duke, when he claimed Obama founded ISIS and his concerning, cozy relationship with Vladimir Putin.

And late Tuesday night, in a particularly head spinning pivot, when he confirmed that he would meet with Mexican president Enrique Pena Nieto just hours before an anticipated speech on immigration policy.

According to the New York Times, the Trump pivot is the point in time when Trump intends to become “more presidential” after softening his positions on immigration. By doing so, according to the Times, Trump will move beyond the fear-mongering and scapegoating views he has infamously spewed during this race.

And now that his “immigration pivot” seems to be happening, Trump has finally come to the point in his campaign where public opinion is forcing a change in his principle policy, what Steve Deace, a conservative radio host and one-time Ted Cruz supporter, once called “the last fig leaf of credibility he had left.”

“There could certainly be a softening [in my immigration plan] because we’re not looking to hurt people,” Trump said during an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity earlier this month. He recommended that instead of deporting all illegal immigrants, it might be better to have some of them possibly stay and “pay back taxes.”

His new direction basically mirrors the plan Sen. Marco Rubio proposed during the primary season that would provide a legal path to citizenship.

Call it a change of heart, call it a slip of the tongue, call it word play. I call it betrayal.

There is no other name for the Trump pivot. Trump insists that he is not flip-flopping on his policies and is simply attempting to find a firm and definitive answer for our nation’s woes, but throughout these past months, the only decision he’s stuck to is maintaining his vitriolic rhetoric — no matter how unfounded it is.

The media has wrongly named Trump’s pivots as a desire to appeal to more moderate and independent voters.

Many say democratic nominee Hillary Clinton has changed her platform as well in order to appeal to a larger demographic. While working with Sen. Bernie Sanders, she moved further to the left, similar to what Trump is attempting now in order to unite his party and bring in outsiders.

But Hillary Clinton has adapted and changed her policies to better fit the mold of the Democratic Party. After discussion with Bernie Sanders, not only did she begin to support the a $15 minimum wage, she also came to disagree with the standards set for the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

When Clinton shifted her policies, she didn’t do so just out of the desire of the public and the Democratic party but as the result of hard facts and well-developed plans. Whether it was eliminating in-state public college tuition for families making $125,000 or less or increasing her minimum wage goal, Clinton has always been prepared to back up her decisions.

That is not what Trump is doing. It is one thing to base policies on polls and coherency, but Trump’s off-handed policies are solely based on bigotry and public outcry. Switching his position has been as simple as issuing a clarification Tweet.

Trump does not have — and has never had — any coherent plans on what his policies could possibly mean for the country. His pivot on immigration is no more than a continuation of duplicity and incoherent statements.

Trump no longer stands on the foundations on which his campaign was built. It won’t be long before his supporters realize that the once-firm ground they previously stood on is giving way.

Write to Saket Rajprohat at Smr122@pitt.edu.